Page 33 - The Errors the American National Academy of Sciences

The NAS's Error Regarding the Origin of Life

Furthermore, a cell coming to the earth from space cannot solve
the difficulties of the theory of evolution, since the theory is unable
to explain how a single cell managed to turn into fish, birds, flow-
ers and human beings.
Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe were among the

most ardent supporters of the idea that life might have come from
space (1981). Francis Crick (1981) and Leslie Orgel (1973) also pro-
posed the idea of "panspermia" (the claim that amino acids in mete-
ors from space reacted with organic substances, thus producing
life). They even took the idea further, suggesting that life had been
designed by living things in space and then sent to Earth. This is
just as futile as claiming that amino acids or the first cell came to
Earth via meteorites, since the question obviously remains of how
the aliens who designed life themselves came into being.

What compels evolutionists to put forward these claims, for
which there is no evidence and which have no other value than as fod-
der for science fiction films? The reason is that these people see that it
is impossible for an evolutionary approach to account for the origin of
life and are desperately seeking a materialist explanation at all costs.
Just to avoid believing in the existence of God, these scientists have
suffered such a collapse of logic as to be able to believe, without a

shred of evidence, in the existence of space creatures—and are unable
to see that the question of how these creatures came into existence
will again leave them staring creation in the face.

1 George Gamow, Biography of the Earth, Viking Press, 1959, p. 156.
2 Sir Fred Hoyle-Chandra Wickramasinghe, Evolution from
Space, New York: Simon and Schuster, 1984, p. 24, p. 148.
3 Manfred Eigen, Steps Toward Life, Oxford: Oxford University
Pres, 1992, p. 11.

31